Critique of the Evolutionarily Significant Unit as a Definition for "Distinct Population Segments" under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

The U.S. Endangered Species Act grants protection to species, subspecies, and "distinct population segments" of vertebrate species. Historically, Congress included distinct population segments into endangered species legislation to enable the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to implement a flexible and pragmatic approach in listing populations of vertebrate species. Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service have proposed a policy that would narrowly define distinct population segments as evolutionarily significant units based on morphological and genetic distinctiveness between populations. Historically, the power to list species or populations as distinct population segments has been used to tailor management practices to unique circumstances; grant varied levels of protection in different parts of a species' range; protect species from extinction in significant portions of their ranges as well as to protect populations that are unique evolutionary entities. A strict redefinition of distinct population segments as evolutionarily significant units will compromise management efforts because the role of demographic and behavioral data will be reduced. Furthermore, strictly cultural, economic, or geographic justifications for listing populations as threatened or endangered will be greatly curtailed.     

Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.     

The Capacity of the National Wildlife Refuge System to Conserve Threatened and Endangered Animal Species in the United States

Abstract:  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages the 38-million-ha National Wildlife Refuge System, which is devoted primarily to wildlife conservation. I examined the capacity of the refuge system to conserve federally listed threatened and endangered animal species. Population viability data for a random sample of these species were analyzed and extrapolated. Three levels of population viability were distinguished: outbreeding, demographic, and evolutionary. One hundred eighty-six of the 514 federally listed animal species reside in whole or in part on the refuge system. Of these 186 species, approximately 81, 101, and 107 are supported by the system at evolutionary, demographic, and outbreeding viability levels, respectively. These figures correspond to 16%, 19%, and 21% of the 514 federally listed animal species, respectively. Various federal policies and programs facilitate the expansion of the refuge system, but other federal policies and programs facilitate economic growth, which tends to require the conversion of habitats faster than it provides for habitat conservation. Therefore the long-run effectiveness, extent, and endurance of the refuge system will depend largely on macroeconomic policy context.     

Taxonomic Considerations in Listing Subspecies Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Abstract:  The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) allows listing of subspecies and other groupings below the rank of species. This provides the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service with a means to target the most critical unit in need of conservation. Although roughly one-quarter of listed taxa are subspecies, these management agencies are hindered by uncertainties about taxonomic standards during listing or delisting activities. In a review of taxonomic publications and societies, we found few subspecies lists and none that stated standardized criteria for determining subspecific taxa. Lack of criteria is attributed to a centuries-old debate over species and subspecies concepts. Nevertheless, the critical need to resolve this debate for ESA listings led us to propose that minimal biological criteria to define disjunct subspecies (legally or taxonomically) should include the discreteness and significance criteria of distinct population segments (as defined under the ESA). Our subspecies criteria are in stark contrast to that proposed by supporters of the phylogenetic species concept and provide a clear distinction between species and subspecies. Efforts to eliminate or reduce ambiguity associated with subspecies-level classifications will assist with ESA listing decisions. Thus, we urge professional taxonomic societies to publish and periodically update peer-reviewed species and subspecies lists. This effort must be paralleled throughout the world for efficient taxonomic conservation to take place.     

Using Phylogenetic Diversity Measures to Set Priorities in Conservation: an Example from Southern South America

Abstract: Phylogenetic diversity measures rank areas for biodiversity conservation priorities based on information encoded in phylogenies (cladograms). The goal of these ranks for conservation is to consider as many factors as possible that provide additional taxic information, such as taxa richness, taxa distributional patterns, area endemicity, and complementarity between areas. At present there are many measures that consider phylogenetic information, including node-based, genetic-distance, and feature-based measures. We devised a modified phylogenetic node-based index that we call "taxonomic endemicity standardized weight," which considers not only the taxonomic distinctness of the taxa that inhabit a given area but their endemicity as well. Once the standardized weight of the taxonomic endemicity identifies the area of highest priority, complementarity can be used to identify the second area and so on. We used this node-based index to rank priority areas for conservation in southern South America, and we compared the results of our rankings to results based on other node-based indexes. Our index identified Santiago district, in Central Chile province, as the highest priority area for conservation, followed by Maule, Malvinas, and districts of Subantarctic province. Malvinas exhibits greater complementarity relative to Santiago than Maule does, however, so Malvinas is ranked second in priority. Indexes based on phylogenetic information measure the evolutionary component of biodiversity and allow one to identify areas that will ensure the preservation of evolutionary potential and phylogenetically rare taxa. The modified index we propose is sensitive to taxic distinctness and endemicity as well and allows information from diverse taxa to be combined (i.e., different cladograms). The use of complementarity allows for preservation of the maximum quantity of taxa in a minimal number of protected areas.     

Quantitative tools for implementing the new definition of significant portion of the range in the U.S. Endangered Species Act

In 2014, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service announced a new policy interpretation for the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). According to the act, a species must be listed as threatened or endangered if it is determined to be threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range (SPR). The 2014 policy seeks to provide consistency by establishing that a portion of the range should be considered significant if the associated individuals’ “removal would cause the entire species to become endangered or threatened.” We reviewed 20 quantitative techniques used to assess whether a portion of a species’ range is significant according to the new guidance. Our assessments are based on the 3R criteria—redundancy (i.e., buffering from catastrophe), resiliency (i.e., ability to withstand stochasticity), and representation (i.e., ability to evolve)—that the FWS uses to determine if a species merits listing. We identified data needs for each quantitative technique and considered which methods could be implemented given the data limitations typical of rare species. We also identified proxies for the 3Rs that may be used with limited data. To assess potential data availability, we evaluated 7 example species by accessing data in their species status assessments, which document all the information used during a listing decision. In all species, an SPR could be evaluated with at least one metric for each of the 3Rs robustly or with substantial assumptions. Resiliency assessments appeared most constrained by limited data, and many species lacked information on connectivity between subpopulations, genetic variation, and spatial variability in vital rates. These data gaps will likely make SPR assessments for species with complex life histories or that cross national boundaries difficult. Although we reviewed techniques for the ESA, other countries require identification of significant areas and could benefit from this research.     

Molecular Taxonomy and the Conservation of the Red Wolf and Other Endangered Carnivores

Recent publications have reaffirmed that the red wolf ( Canis rufus ) is a hybrid of the coyote and the gray wolf. Besides the implications these results will likely have for future conservation efforts and allotment of resources through the Endangered Species Act for recovery of the red wolf, it is likely that broader consequences will be felt throughout the conservation community as species come under the scrutiny of a more powerful means of taxonomic identification. As molecular technology is refined in its ability to resolve taxonomic histories and uncertainties, it is likely that hybridization event(s) will be recognized in more species. This may be of particular importance for large carnivores, whose small population sizes make them susceptible to hybridization episodes with closely related, sympatric species. Because of negative perceptions, powerful antipredator advocates, conservation and resource constraints, and an enigmatic hybrid policy within the Endangered Species Act, how red-wolf taxonomy is decided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may affect the future of large carnivores in general.     

Improving species status assessments under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and implications for multispecies conservation challenges worldwide

Despite its successes, the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) has proven challenging to implement due to funding limitations, workload backlog, and other problems. As threats to species survival intensify and as more species come under threat, the need for the ESA and similar conservation laws and policies in other countries to function efficiently has grown. Attempts by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to streamline ESA decisions include multispecies recovery plans and habitat conservation plans. We address species status assessment (SSA), a USFWS process to inform ESA decisions from listing to recovery, within the context of multispecies and ecosystem planning. Although existing SSAs have a single-species focus, ecosystem-based research can efficiently inform multiple SSAs within a region and provide a foundation for transition to multispecies SSAs in the future. We considered at-risk grassland species and ecosystems within the southeastern United States, where a disproportionate number of rare and endemic species are associated with grasslands. To initiate our ecosystem-based approach, we used a combined literature-based and structured World Café workshop format to identify science needs for SSAs. Discussions concentrated on 5 categories of threats to grassland species and ecosystems, consistent with recommendations to make shared threats a focus of planning under the ESA: (1) habitat loss, fragmentation, and disruption of functional connectivity; (2) climate change; (3) altered disturbance regimes; (4) invasive species; and (5) localized impacts. For each threat, workshop participants identified science and information needs, including database availability, research priorities, and modeling and mapping needs. Grouping species by habitat and shared threats can make the SSA process and other planning processes for conservation of at-risk species worldwide more efficient and useful. We found a combination of literature review and structured discussion effective for identifying the scientific information and analysis needed to support the development of multiple SSAs. Article impact statement: Species status assessments can be improved by an ecosystem-based approach that groups imperiled species by shared habitats and threats.     

Importance of Well-Designed Monitoring Programs for the Conservation of Endangered Species: Case Study of the Snail Kite

Abstract:  Monitoring natural populations is often a necessary step to establish the conservation status of species and to help improve management decisions. Nevertheless, many monitoring programs do not effectively address primary sources of variability in monitoring data, which ultimately may limit the utility of monitoring in identifying declines and improving management. To illustrate the importance of taking into account detectability and spatial variation, we used a recently proposed estimator of abundance (superpopulation estimator) to estimate population size of and number of young produced by the Snail Kite ( Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus ) in Florida. During the last decade, primary recovery targets set by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the Snail Kite that were based on deficient monitoring programs (i.e., uncorrected counts) were close to being met (by simply increasing search effort during count surveys). During that same period, the Snail Kite population declined dramatically (by 55% from 1997 to 2005) and the number of young decreased by 70% between 1992–1998 and 1999–2005. Our results provide a strong practical case in favor of the argument that investing a sufficient amount of time and resources into designing and implementing monitoring programs that carefully address detectability and spatial variation is critical for the conservation of endangered species.     

Public Willingness to Pay for Recovering and Downlisting Threatened and Endangered Marine Species

Abstract: Nonmarket valuation research has produced economic value estimates for a variety of threatened, endangered, and rare species around the world. Although over 40 value estimates exist, it is often difficult to compare values from different studies due to variations in study design, implementation, and modeling specifications. We conducted a stated‐preference choice experiment to estimate the value of recovering or downlisting 8 threatened and endangered marine species in the United States: loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica), upper Willamette River Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Hawaiian monk seals (Monachus schauinslandi), and smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata). In May 2009, we surveyed a random sample of U.S. households. We collected data from 8476 households and estimated willingness to pay for recovering and downlisting the 8 species from these data. Respondents were willing to pay for recovering and downlisting threatened and endangered marine taxa. Willingness‐to‐pay values ranged from $40/household for recovering Puget Sound Chinook salmon to $73/household for recovering the North Pacific right whale. Statistical comparisons among willingness‐to‐pay values suggest that some taxa are more economically valuable than others, which suggests that the U.S. public's willingness to pay for recovery may vary by species.     

Resolving Critical Habitat Designation Failures: Reconciling Law, Policy, and Biology

Abstract:  The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires designation of critical habitat concurrent with species listing. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service often has not designated critical habitat, based on the legal exceptions in the ESA of "not prudent" or "not determinable." This lack of habitat designation has led to numerous lawsuits and court orders to designate critical habitat for listed species. Court-mediated implementation of critical habitat is costly and delays listing for at-risk species. Legal, policy, judicial, and biological issues all contribute to the current inability of the law as enforced to lead to timely and cost-effective critical habitat designation. Although increased appropriations and delaying critical habitat designation until recovery planning have been proposed as solutions, we find that it will be essential to change the critical-habitat guidelines to a decision-analysis framework to make critical habitat scientifically and legally workable as a conservation tool.     

Correlates of Population Recovery Goals in Endangered Birds

Abstract: Endangered species recovery plans commonly set goals for population size that are used to define the success of recovery efforts. We examined variation in these population recovery goals for bird species listed under the U. S. Endangered Species Act to determine whether there were simple predictors of recovery population size. The median population sizes that must be met for a species to be removed from the list or downlisted to the threatened category are 4000 and 1500 respectively, but the thresholds varied considerably. Most variation in population recovery goals ( ≥75%) was explained by the population size when the recovery plan was written. Species listed when their population's size was relatively large have higher population recovery goals, whereas those listed when populations were small have lower population goals. Population sizes set for recovery also increased over time and were higher for species listed throughout the United States rather than for part of the country. In combination, these three variables explained 86% of the variance in population goals for delisting and 94% of the variance in goals for downlisting. Body mass, annual fecundity, maximum lifespan, whether the population was listed as threatened or endangered, and whether a formal population viability analysis was conducted were variables not significantly associated with population recovery goals. Thus, we found that variables relating to the circumstances under which the populations were listed could explain almost all of the variance in recovery population goals, and that biological traits of the endangered birds explained little of the variance.     

The Importance of Analysis Method for Breeding Bird Survey Population Trend Estimates

Population trends from the Breeding Bird Survey are widely used to focus conservation efforts on species thought to be in decline and to test preliminary hypotheses regarding the causes of these declines. A number of statistical methods have been used to estimate population trends, but there is no consensus as to which is the most reliable. We quantified differences in trend estimates or different analysis methods applied to the same subset of Breeding Bird Survey data. We estimated trends for 115 species in British Columbia using three analysis methods: U.S. National Biological Service route regression, Canadian Wildlife Service route regression, and nonparametric rank-trends analysis. Overall, the number of species estimated to be declining was similar among the three methods, but the number of statistically significant declines was not similar (15, 8, and 29 respectively). In addition, many differences existed among methods in the trend estimates assigned to individual species. Comparing the two route regression methods, Canadian Wildlife Service estimates had a greater absolute magnitude on average than those of the U.S. National Biological Service method. U.S. National Biological Service estimates were on average more positive than the Canadian Wildlife Service estimates when the respective agency's data selection criteria were applied separately. These results imply that our ability to detect population declines and to prioritize species of conservation concern depend strongly upon the analysis method used. This highlights the need for further research to determine how best to accurately estimate trends from the data. We suggest a method for evaluating the performance of the analysis methods by using simulated Breeding Bird Survey data.     

Evolutionary Significant Units versus Geopolitical Taxonomy: Molecular Systematics of an Endangered Sea Turtle (genus Chelonia)

Abstract: Taxonomic rank is an important criterion in assessing the conservation priority of an endangered organism: the sole member of a distinct family will generally receive a higher priority than a semi-isolated population in a polytypic species. When cryptic evolutionary partitions are discovered in endangered species, these findings are heralded as a positive step in the conservation process. The opposite action, demoting the taxonomic rank of an endangered organism, can be resisted by the conservation community because it is perceived as detrimental to preservation efforts. We explore the arguments for and against the species status of the endangered black turtle ( Chelonia agassizii ) and contribute an additional data set based on DNA sequences of single-copy nuclear loci. These data are concordant with previous mtDNA surveys in indicating no evolutionary distinction between C. agassizii and adjacent green turtle ( C. mydas ) populations. Although the black turtle is morphologically identifiable at a low level, much of its distinction is based on size and color differences that are highly variable throughout the range of C. mydas . Thus the black turtle would be more accurately classified at the subspecific or population level. There is no strong scientific case available to defend the species status of C. agassizii , and yet that designation has persisted for over a century. We suggest that the maintenance of this name is based on geographical and political considerations, and we propose a pragmatic category for this type of taxonomy: the geopolitical species . Furthermore, we argue against the practice of preserving species status for conservation purposes. There are several good reasons to preserve the black turtle, including morphological diversity and the possibility that it is an incipient evolutionary lineage with novel adaptations; taxonomic rank, however, is not one of them.     

Impacts of phylogenetic nomenclature on the efficacy of the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Cataloging biodiversity is critical to conservation efforts because accurate taxonomy is often a precondition for protection under laws designed for species conservation, such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Traditional nomenclatural codes governing the taxonomic process have recently come under scrutiny because taxon names are more closely linked to hierarchical ranks than to the taxa themselves. A new approach to naming biological groups, called phylogenetic nomenclature (PN), explicitly names taxa by defining their names in terms of ancestry and descent. PN has the potential to increase nomenclatural stability and decrease confusion induced by the rank‐based codes. But proponents of PN have struggled with whether species and infraspecific taxa should be governed by the same rules as other taxa or should have special rules. Some proponents advocate the wholesale abandonment of rank labels (including species); this could have consequences for the implementation of taxon‐based conservation legislation. I examined the principles of PN as embodied in the PhyloCode (an alternative to traditional rank‐based nomenclature that names biological groups based on the results of phylogenetic analyses and does not associate taxa with ranks) and assessed how this novel approach to naming taxa might affect the implementation of species‐based legislation by providing a case study of the ESA. The latest version of the PhyloCode relies on the traditional rank‐based codes to name species and infraspecific taxa; thus, little will change regarding the main targets of the ESA because they will retain rank labels. For this reason, and because knowledge of evolutionary relationships is of greater importance than nomenclatural procedures for initial protection of endangered taxa under the ESA, I conclude that PN under the PhyloCode will have little impact on implementation of the ESA. Impactos de la Nomenclatura Filogenética sobre la Eficiencia del Acta Estadunidense para las Especies en Peligro     

Salt Marsh Harvest Mice, Urban Development, and Rising Sea Levels

Abstract: The salt marsh harvest mouse, Reithrodontomys raviventris , is endemic to the marshes of San Francisco Bay. Ultimate factors such as rising sea level and tectonic changes will play important roles in the future management of the mouse, causing a shift from tidal marshes threatened by submergence to diked marshes threatened by development Land values and government regulations force the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies into proximate management strategies to recover the species. Whether large enough areas of diked marsh can be acquired in the near future to adequately protect the mouse in perpetuity is questioned.     

Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Endangered Species Hotspots in the United States

Abstract: Given limited resources, many researchers advocate focusing conservation efforts on hotspots, geographical areas with high numbers of species (i.e., richness), endemic species, rare or threatened species, and/or high levels of threat to species survival. The hotspot approach is an efficient and simple way to conserve species diversity, assuming that hotspots do not change over space or time. We tested whether hotspots change across space and time using a database of endangered and threatened species listed by the U.S. government from 1967 to 1999. We determined hotspots based on the cumulative set of species listed for three overlapping and successively longer time periods: 1967–1979, 1967–1989, and 1967–1999. We used minimum area complimentarity analysis, which selected the smallest set of areas (in our study, U.S. counties) needed to represent a chosen set of species. Over time, the number of endangered and threatened species in the United States increased from 76 in 1967 to 1123 in 1999. As the number of species increased over time, hotspots changed in two ways: the number of hotspots increased and the rank of hotspots shifted. Hotspots increased from 84 in 1979, to 166 in 1989, to 217 in 1999. Only 63 of these counties were designated as hotspots in all three periods. The remaining changes resulted from addition and deletion of counties as hotspots over time. Some counties were removed from the list or changed in relative rank from one time period to the next regardless of their rank. Counties added as hotspots could rank anywhere on the list, and they were not merely low-ranking counties added to represent one or a few species. Therefore, hotspots serve as a useful tool for guiding conservation efforts but, given their spatiotemporal variability, do not represent a final solution.     

Correlations among Extinction Risks Assessed by Different Systems of Threatened Species Categorization

Abstract:  Many different systems are used to assess levels of threat faced by species. Prominent ones are those used by the World Conservation Union, NatureServe, and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (now the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission). These systems assign taxa a threat ranking by assessing their demographic and ecological characteristics. These threat rankings support the legislative protection of species and guide the placement of conservation programs in order of priority. It is not known, however, whether these assessment systems rank species in a similar order. To resolve this issue, we assessed 55 mainly vertebrate taxa with widely differing life histories under each of these systems and determined the rank correlations among them. Moderate, significant positive correlations were seen among the threat rankings provided by the three systems (correlations 0.58–0.69). Further, the threat rankings for taxa obtained using these systems were significantly correlated to their rankings based on predicted probability of extinction within 100 years as determined by population viability analysis (correlations 0.28–0.37). The different categorization systems, then, yield related but not identical threat rankings, and these rankings are associated with predicted extinction risk.     

Species Inequality in Scientific Study

Abstract: Some conservationists argue for a focused effort to protect the most critically endangered species, and others suggest a large‐scale endeavor to safeguard common species across large areas. Similar arguments are applicable to the distribution of scientific effort among species. Should conservation scientists focus research efforts on threatened species, common species, or do all species deserve equal attention? We assessed the scientific equity among 1909 mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians of southern Africa by relating the number of papers written about each species to their status on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List. Threatened large mammals and reptiles had more papers written about them than their nonthreatened counterparts, whereas threatened small mammals and amphibians received less attention than nonthreatened species. Threatened birds received an intermediate amount of attention in the scientific literature. Thus, threat status appears to drive scientific effort among some animal groups, whereas other factors (e.g., pest management and commercial interest) appear to dictate scientific investment in particular species of other groups. Furthermore, the scientific investment per species differed greatly between groups—the mean number of papers per threatened large mammal eclipsed that of threatened reptiles, birds, small mammals, and amphibians by 2.6‐, 15‐, 216‐, and more than 500‐fold, respectively. Thus, in the eyes of science, all species are not created equal. A few species commanded a great proportion of scientific attention, whereas for many species information that might inform conservation is virtually nonexistent.     

The Biopolitics of the Mt. Graham Red Squirrel (Tamiasciuris hudsonicus grahamensis)

This essay presents (1) a short status summary on the population biology of the Mt. Graham red squirrel on the Pinaleño Mountains, Arizona; (2) a biopolitical history of the controversy surrounding the Mt. Graham red squirrel, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the astronomical consortium that has constructed two telescopes within the squirrel's critical habitat; and (3) a discussion of specific biopolitical issues related to the squirrel's taxonomy, minimal viable habitat, critical habitat, population viability analysis, risk management, and Congressional actions to by-pass its own laws. The biopolitical history shows how specific administrative actions within the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and special interest politics by the Arizona Congressional delegation and the University of Arizona prevented an accurate assessment of the status of the Mt. Graham red squirrel and implementation of alternatives to insure its survival and recovery. Conservation biology can influence management decisions when not overridden by special-favor politics. To improve the influence of the science of conservation biology, I recommend that the ESA language protecting isolated populations (Section 3) remain intact and that the ESA make a legal distinction (Section 4) between minimal viable habitat and critical habitat. To improve the application of the ESA, I recommend that Congress require committee hearings before it can exempt a project from federal environmental laws; that fraudulent Biological Opinions automatically trigger a complete review of long-term viability; that conservation biologists prepare a handbook for the Fish and Wildlife Service on risk assessment techniques; that all data and analyses within the Biological Opinion include a ranking by their statistical and biological certainty as well as a worst-case scenario; and that each Biological Opinion be certified as risk averse.